Creditor Objects To SCO's Plans 108
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "It seems that SCO is never without a trick up its sleeve. In the new '$100 million' reorganization plan, $5 million of which is cash and $95 million credit, one of the creditors is protesting because SCO is hiding the Definitive Documents until there's no time to object. In their own words, 'The debtors are proposing to file the Disclosure Statement 33 days before the hearing, in compliance with the requirement that it be filed at least 25 days before the hearing (F. R. Bankr. P. 3017). However, it is clear that this Disclosure Statement will be inadequate for evaluating the Plan, because it will not include any of the Definitive Documents. The Debtors are proposing to file the Definitive Documents separately, and to do so a mere five business days before the hearing, which is zero days before objections are due.'"
When ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
SCO claims that its IP rights from UnixWare cover the latest kernel version of Linux, v.2.4, which includes code important in symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) scaling. SCO said it will offer UnixWare licenses to enterprises that use Linux 2.4 and later and will not sue Linux customers for past copyright violations if they buy a UnixWare license.
Right...so how is that working out for them?
And good luck suing Linux users...you may want to ask the RIAA how the whole litigation thing is going, and in this case there isn't even a flimsy legal rock to stand on.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, that is SOOO 90s. Unfortunately, SCO doesn't have a headlock on the POSIX standard.
Re: (Score:1)
Fraud (Score:5, Insightful)
Judge Kimball already found that there was never any transfer of copyright. SCO's copyright registration was fraudulent (well, I suppose you could make the argument that it isn't fraud if they really *believed* they owned the copyright, but nevertheless, it's still invalid). It's already been decided that SCO does not own Unix copyrights or trademarks (the trademark issue was not decided in court, I do not believe, but by the US Patent and Trademark Office, I believe, which said that Unix was already a trademark owned by the Open Group [which anyone could have told SCO, but they wouldn't listen, of course]).
Basically, SCO owns no part of Unix.
There's also the *small* problem that they've never actually demonstrated any infringement by Linux, even if they *did* own Unix. Which they don't.
This whole Bankruptcy charade, as far as I can tell, has mostly been about delaying the inevitable, so that SCO's execs and board of director could continue to get salaries and outrageous bonuses for as long as possible, bleeding the company dry and leaving a worthless, dessicated carcass for Novell, IBM, Red Hat, and Autozone to fight over.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Fraud (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Mmmmm... stock! (Score:2)
The only thing he has to worry about is if the stock were to (for some unknown reason, god forbid!) become worthless...
Re:Never (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
http://slashdot.org/~SCO%24699FeeTroll/ [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Dont forget... (Score:2, Funny)
Fixed
get two more creditors and press for chapter 7 (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:get two more creditors and press for chapter 7 (Score:5, Insightful)
If anything now would be the time to advocate the Linux idea / OS more than ever. Computer kids out there get called all the time to fix friends and families computers, you should offer a special $20 install that would involve you installing a distro on their computer. The price is variable of course but distro's could work with the installers to make the going rate tempting enough for anyone to attempt to offer it at the price. People would look at it as quick cash, distributions would see that the easier it is for someone to install and educate the end user the more people will install their distribution for a price. Eventually as people grow more aware of the OS they will search out to install it themselves, at this point the OS will be so easy to install and run it will catch like wild fire.
Now the ones who were installing the OS move up to support / customization. What ever the price charged to do an install will be used as a type of yard stick of value. Eventually with computer power increasing and OS developers cooperation the time to install a running OS will take less time but as long as the price remains set and the operation is exact and efficient you will be making that $20-$40 in under 10 minutes. From there you can use that as a reference to charge for time in support and customization. As long as the initial price does not waver much people will build trust in the concept and the best will be in demand. This is the most diverse and distributed industry that will ever be.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So no, you likely won't get many takers for the Linux install for $20, because most people who are interested would probably do it themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Also to support the effort, more hardware vendors need to wake up and start coding Linux drivers for their products. Why, just a week ago I saw a great deal on a
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:When ... (Score:4, Funny)
No,no...this is /. (Score:1, Funny)
And Yes, I AM an insensitive clod.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
They would have disappeared (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It was and continues to be a total SCO deal. The money they extorted from Sun and Microsoft is pretty much in line with other IPR ransom demands. IBM has so far spent at least $100 million litigating this one, Novell at least $10 million. IBM could have settled for l
Re: (Score:2)
IBM could have settled for less than they have spent ...
That's an elementary error in game theory, the failure to distinguish a single instance game from an iterated game.
It's also an elementary error in management theory: failure to distinguish a narrow effect from broad and recurring effects.
It's a also an elementary error in basic manhood: s
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but the problem is that the stakes cost $2 million each and the supply of vampires is rather larger than you might imagine.
Why is it the duty of the victims to take on what has become a government sponsored extortion racket? Doesn't the government have a responsibility to act as well
Surprise anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a flaw in the American judicial system (Score:5, Insightful)
It is pathetic that SCO has been able to drag this farce out for so long.
Re: (Score:2)
For whatever reason in the US you can basically tie up courts as long as you'd like. First person to run out of money loses.
Just about any kind of litigation costs a fortune here - mainly because stuff gets dragged out forever...
Re: (Score:2)
From wikipedia: A strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal, most often "winning".
Unless their goal was something other than "winning".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The goal has been "FUDding" all along.
This whole thing has been an obvious farce that Karl Rove would have been proud of perpetrated by the Monopoly to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt while trying to advance the latest sinking flagship OS on the world, all in the hope that the entire world would be so stupid, apathetic, or blind as to accept it all.
Unfortunately for them, they chose a smarter opponent, the Linux community. Bastard Operators from Hell ar
Re: (Score:1)
Tomorrow is always an easier time to finally turn it all in, especially if you have to pull it out of your hat.
Tagged: (Score:5, Funny)
undead
whywontyoujustdie
Re:Tagged: (Score:5, Funny)
Has anobody tried any holy water?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You must be new here. Everybody knows there's no such thing as Silver Bullets in IT.
Re: (Score:2)
No no no, silver bullets are for werewolves. To vanquish evil assholes, you need to hit'em with a silver suppository!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
THE POWER OF STALLMAN COMPELS YOU!!!111one.
Or something of that nature
Re:Tagged: (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking of tags. . .
Holding knowledge of another's dark secrets is one of the foremost ways the game of politics is played.
I remember knowing the daughter of a political figure who had taught her well; he took her out drinking often when she was only a young teen so that she could build up a high tolerance to alcohol. He taught her how to dig up secrets in her opponents, and he taught her how to corrupt her fellows so that they would have secrets to fear losing control of. He was grooming he for political life; in short, he taught her the ways of Fear.
Early on when I met her, I told her that my way of living was to remain open about everything; there was no secret I would be too frightened to share, and in this way, there was no way I could be bound or controlled. I saw fear in her eyes when she looked at me then, and I didn't understand why until I got to know her better.
I have seen more harm arise from secrets kept than I ever would have imagined possible. And I have seen the most ludicrous acts which would normally be sorely condemned by society, not only easily forgiven but benefited from by entire communities simply because the participants were never afraid to share their thoughts and actions openly.
In this way, knowledge shared is power gained, and that is the only kind of power one really needs, because Good Guys don't play chess.
Just some thoughts.
-FL
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
So, you an Obama supporter now?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Interesting thoughts. You touch on a theme that I have been thinking about lately: zero sum games versus more creative solutions.
So often we get stuck in zero sum games. You give up knowledge: I win; you lose. You get what you want: you win, I lose.
But it doesn't have to be that way. Shared knowledge can mean gains for both parties. Enabling your collaborators (competitors?) allows you to concentrate on your strengths.
Indeed, life does not have to be a chess match. But creativity and innovation are of
Says you. (Score:2)
with that and the "live my life" crap you just come off as sanctimonious
Sanctimonious? Well, that's subjective. All I can say is that I do my best to be the best version of myself. I don't always get it right, but it's hardly fair to say that anybody's efforts are false.
And calling me a liar? Come on. --You can't actually do that within the bounds of logic. The best you can honest
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There are better ways to deal with people than lie-cheat-steal-blackmail. Yes, even if you
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, well... (Score:5, Informative)
"We saw a tremendous investment opportunity in SCO and its vast range of products and services, including many new innovations ready or soon to be ready to be released into the marketplace," said Stephen Norris, managing partner for SCNP....
About Stephen Norris Partners
Stephen Norris & Co. Capital Partners, L.P. is a private equity investment partnership formed to (i) "co-invest" alongside well established and successful private equity and leveraged buyout firms, (ii) take advantage of the business experience and relationships of its Investment Committee, including Steve Norris' long-standing relationships and substantial private equity experience.
While the press release says that SNCP is a partnership, the MOU says it's a deal between SCO and STEVE NORRIS CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC and it defines SNCP as "Stephen Norris Capital Partners, LLC" and it further says it's a Delaware limited liability company ("Investment Team: Stephen Norris Capital Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("SNCP").").
Re:Yes, well... (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess "products and services" means troll patents and lawsuits.
I wonder what "new innovations" of these they are about to unleash?
Re: (Score:1)
Don't hold your breath - the $100 mil was more of a bailout than a future-booster.
SCO... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
MONSANTO!
Re: (Score:1)
Get your money NOW! (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey, with these guys, get your money now. The lawyers fees will eat it otherwise.
Totally amazes me how this takes so long to say what everyone believes, SCO - go-away. You have no claim nor future.
News? (Score:1)
Sounds like the creditors are getting what they deserve. Lay down with dogs...
Re:News? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:News? (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole thing is just a ploy to shield all those internal emails and documents that would reveal just who was really behind it all, we all know that M$ is in on it but who else could there be? What other companies or business interests have benefited from the FUD that SCO has generated?
By buying SCO and taking it back to a privatively held company it could be quietly dismantled and the evidence of collusion and conspiracy buried permanently.
Re: (Score:2)
If Microsoft is behind this VC taking an interest in SCO, I can think of only two possible reasons:
1. They don't know when to give up and look for another tack. Possible, certainly.
2. There is a lot more to this than we already know
Here is the real story (Score:5, Insightful)
Legitimate businesses are dying for venture capital. And here it is, being wasted.
Re:Here is the real story (Score:5, Interesting)
Legitimate businesses are dying for venture capital. And here it is, being wasted.
And anyone with two neurons left to rub together to make a spark would know that. You'd think anyone investing 100 million dollars would be a little more careful about where their money's going, wouldn't you? But they're not really investing a 100 million, they're investing 5 million.
So someone is willing to put up five mil to SCO in exchange for nothing. That same someone thinks that five million is not being wasted. Since they're getting nothing from SCO, what are they getting? Not that this bizarro world plan has any chance getting past the trustee, but where do they keep finding collaborators to go along with this fraud?
Another line of questioning might ask who could get someone do go along with flushing 100 million, or even five million down the toilet? That's a shorter list. Because if SCO goes begging for dollars, they'd get laughed out of the room. So it's not SCO. That would leave Microsoft. They have lots of money. People with money usually have friends with money. But what's Microsoft getting at this point? Nothing. This case exhausted its value to them years ago. Vista is a giant, steaming turd and everyone knows it. Linux and Apple are feasting on their entrails and the EU is hitting them with billions in fines.
So, what's the five million for?
Re: (Score:2)
"Teh lulz", obviously. At this point SCO is a practical joke perpetuated by multimillionaires.
Re: (Score:2)
Hush money? (Score:2)
Total speculation: maybe this is the part where msft wants the scam to just go away. Act as if it never happened. So everybody gets enough loot, so that they have nothing to really bitch about. Then scox is taken private, and disovled.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha (Score:2, Funny)
Settle it more efficiently! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Give Mr D what he is good at... (Score:4, Funny)
Not a creditor (Score:5, Informative)
Reminds me of a story about. . . (Score:3, Funny)
The Lady falls in love with a Snake, and she invites him into her home.
The Snake bites her, and hurt and horrified, she cries, "I will surely die! Why? Why did you bite me?"
"But my dear," the Snake replied, "I am a Snake, and you should have known better."
Moral of the story? Same as every other. . . "Ignorance Endangers."
-FL
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I almost said the moral was, "Don't be Stupid!", thinking that this was the ubiquitous moral of all stories, but then figured it was way too pejorative. Even smart people make mistakes when they don't know any better.
-FL
Irony? (Score:2)
Wow, Weird Writeup. (Score:5, Funny)
Serves you right. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
New acronym? (Score:1)
What Did you Expect? SCO == (Score:1)
SCO == Slimy Conniving Obfuscators
or if you prefer:
Smelly Cumwad Onanists
Smarmy Cretinous Organization
Scat Consuming Organisms
Smoke Casting Operators
Sue-happy Criminal Operation
Silly Craven Oblocutors
Sullen Crooked Obscurators
Seed Capital Obliterators
Silly Corporate Odditorium
Shit Casting Odibles
Saccadic Cacogenic Onomancers
Sacculiformed Coprolithic Oschealopaths
Salacious Contumacious Ophidians
Sanctimonious Contemptuous Opisthosomes
A shock? (Score:2)